AT-LP120 and Technics Sl-1200 MK2
- Thread starter arcorob
- Start date
- Status
arcorob
Addicted Member
Wow....
That is just so wrong..so then every test UNLESS its the highest quality hi-fi is invalid ? This is a standard normal setup. Two turntables. Check. Same AT 440Ml/OCC. Check. Art DJ Pre II for a neutral phono stage. Check. Echo Gina box and sound card. Check.
what would be INVALID would be to put a $2000 phono stage in the test. People buying a $200 turntables rarely have 2K phono stages. Or it would be invalid if I used different equipment ..but these clips are far from muddy...Oh..thats right, you haven't heard the private clips..
Some of you will find any way you can to invalidate a test..but that's okay..because others appreciate it and see the value.
That is just so wrong..so then every test UNLESS its the highest quality hi-fi is invalid ? This is a standard normal setup. Two turntables. Check. Same AT 440Ml/OCC. Check. Art DJ Pre II for a neutral phono stage. Check. Echo Gina box and sound card. Check.
what would be INVALID would be to put a $2000 phono stage in the test. People buying a $200 turntables rarely have 2K phono stages. Or it would be invalid if I used different equipment ..but these clips are far from muddy...Oh..thats right, you haven't heard the private clips..
Some of you will find any way you can to invalidate a test..but that's okay..because others appreciate it and see the value.
gusten
Addicted Member
I see it as the setup is perfectly fine, there is no specific 'bottleneck', whatever that is in audio.
It´s not so IMO that the files sound exactly the same, it´s just that couple a sound to a specific TT is difficult. And it will always be difficult if we don´t see the TT, never mind what TT.
gusten
It´s not so IMO that the files sound exactly the same, it´s just that couple a sound to a specific TT is difficult. And it will always be difficult if we don´t see the TT, never mind what TT.
gusten
gusten
Addicted Member
gusten
Addicted Member
By my remark I meant that normally it´s very difficult if at all possible to know what is the real 'bottleneck'. There are so many things that can be improved, e.g. different records can sound very differently on a normal system.
gusten
Before this tread completely collapses into a "contest", I want to thank the OP for his efforts. My wife I & listened to the public samples & the subject generated some interesting discussion. Despite all the opinions here & elsewhere, there is precious little in the way of documented blind tests.
Hail Vinyl!
Active Member
I've just did it. Of course, the listening experience is very different, but the overall impression I posted before is still the same. Nothing different to report.
ODS123
Super Member
In my opinion, this hobby has long been diminished by poorly substantiated claims of how this amp sounds better than that, DAC "A" is smoother than DAC "B", Turntable "X" more sparkly than Turntable "Y" etc.., and so on. ..It benefits the goals of this hobby, even if quite humbling to many audiophiles, to have an opportunity to directly compare, in a blinded way, source component as arcorob has allowed us to do.
..I for one am not the least bit surprised that people have great difficultly distinguishing b/w the two.
..I for one am not the least bit surprised that people have great difficultly distinguishing b/w the two.
Last edited:
arcorob
Addicted Member
Comparisons
Comparisons are only normal and valid in a common setting and should not be confused with out of instance experience.
what did he just say ? LOL
You go to best buy. You look at 10 TV's. You can see them all pretty much at a glance. Your eyes in that setting detect the one or ones most pleasing to your eyes. You do not say "well, my lighting is different, my room color, my DVD player, etc.) though you might to some degree, your comparison is being done in a common setting with all other things being equal and not considering things not in that instance (such as remembering how the image of someone else's TV looked)
The same with audio. You go to an audio store and you audition a AT L120 and Technics SL-1200MK2. Both have a AT440Ml/OCC cart. They play them through the same fine set of speakers, same amps, etc.
In that comparative moment you make a decision on which sounds more pleasing to you. Maybe you hate both because you don't like the amp or speakers being used, the audiophile in you coming out however; you are still able to distinguish a difference if there is one.
So in effect there is no bottleneck in this test. Either they sound different or they don't.
Now it would be valid if one said the sampling was so poor that they were indistinguishable, but that is not the case.
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=D25B243EF6E53584!133
Comparisons are only normal and valid in a common setting and should not be confused with out of instance experience.
what did he just say ? LOL
You go to best buy. You look at 10 TV's. You can see them all pretty much at a glance. Your eyes in that setting detect the one or ones most pleasing to your eyes. You do not say "well, my lighting is different, my room color, my DVD player, etc.) though you might to some degree, your comparison is being done in a common setting with all other things being equal and not considering things not in that instance (such as remembering how the image of someone else's TV looked)
The same with audio. You go to an audio store and you audition a AT L120 and Technics SL-1200MK2. Both have a AT440Ml/OCC cart. They play them through the same fine set of speakers, same amps, etc.
In that comparative moment you make a decision on which sounds more pleasing to you. Maybe you hate both because you don't like the amp or speakers being used, the audiophile in you coming out however; you are still able to distinguish a difference if there is one.
So in effect there is no bottleneck in this test. Either they sound different or they don't.
Now it would be valid if one said the sampling was so poor that they were indistinguishable, but that is not the case.
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=D25B243EF6E53584!133
Neither am I, but, I suspect, for entirely different reasons.
I'm all for you making this comparison but a bottleneck is a bottleneck. There's no difference if its at the sampling moment, or if the phono preamp is where you're losing information. Either way, you're handicapping whichever is the better table, if it is capable of more performance than can be delivered by the phono preamp, and the other table isn't.
Again, I agree that it is what it is..this comparison only need be between these tables, using this preamp. Its not going to mean much beyond that, nor does it need to. But I get where the complaint is coming from. A weak link is going to benefit the lesser table.
arcorob
Addicted Member
Know what
I get a little miffed when people DIS the ART DJ. I think many can't believe something can sound that good and cost $39. But know what? It has better specs than units costing hundreds more...serious...and I have tried some ..YUCK ..Pro-ject Tube box II...Yuck..NAD..Yuck..Was tempted to try the Cambridge audio but that has terrible specs and even Hypnotoad had to write a mod for it to sound decent....
I think people need to give it more credit...TRY BEFORE BASHING...I can afford pricier...I just haven't found better within a reasonable price.
I am Arcorob and I support this message...
http://artproaudio.com/artcessories/turntable_preamps/product/djpre_ii/
http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/media/azur-540p-640p-user-manual-english-1358263979.pdf (check the specs)
I get a little miffed when people DIS the ART DJ. I think many can't believe something can sound that good and cost $39. But know what? It has better specs than units costing hundreds more...serious...and I have tried some ..YUCK ..Pro-ject Tube box II...Yuck..NAD..Yuck..Was tempted to try the Cambridge audio but that has terrible specs and even Hypnotoad had to write a mod for it to sound decent....
I think people need to give it more credit...TRY BEFORE BASHING...I can afford pricier...I just haven't found better within a reasonable price.
I am Arcorob and I support this message...
http://artproaudio.com/artcessories/turntable_preamps/product/djpre_ii/
http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/media/azur-540p-640p-user-manual-english-1358263979.pdf (check the specs)
Now there's an interesting concept. Try before bashing!
BrocLuno
Lunatic Member
These are not Delphi tables running through hand built phono stages driven by mega dollar MC cartridges. This is a real world scenario with gear the average hobbyist might put together while sorting and learning. The comparo is entirely valid for that scenario.
Yeah, maybe a Technics can support "more" cartridge than the AT ... We've already alluded to that. But, likely both will top out with cartridges under $1K or so. The arms are not really light enough for super compliant cartridges. And there might be better options for MCs too ...
The AT can easily be improved for less than a KAB kitted Technics. Some "bed liner" under the platter for dampening. Some Dynamat in the plinth/base and some Silicone caulk around the area behind hinges or run w/o the cover (slips off easily enough) as it's the main feedback component.
No need to get crazy with cartridges, but having three or four and 78 on the ready is nice. And for the folks who don't play 78's, it may be one less reason to look here. But I do and I have a few hundred of them from family and friends. Shellac is fun. Sort of like 45's are fun, but different
This is a good little work horse and worth the price of entry. Sorry, if it pisses off some Technics owners who think the world revolves around their TT, that the AT even comes as close as it does. Technics are good every day TTs for the masses, but they're not a GT2000 by a long shot.
And nobody is trying to make either of these into a real upscale TT. They do what they do. Be happy and spin some vinyl (or shellac)
Yeah, maybe a Technics can support "more" cartridge than the AT ... We've already alluded to that. But, likely both will top out with cartridges under $1K or so. The arms are not really light enough for super compliant cartridges. And there might be better options for MCs too ...
The AT can easily be improved for less than a KAB kitted Technics. Some "bed liner" under the platter for dampening. Some Dynamat in the plinth/base and some Silicone caulk around the area behind hinges or run w/o the cover (slips off easily enough) as it's the main feedback component.
No need to get crazy with cartridges, but having three or four and 78 on the ready is nice. And for the folks who don't play 78's, it may be one less reason to look here. But I do and I have a few hundred of them from family and friends. Shellac is fun. Sort of like 45's are fun, but different
This is a good little work horse and worth the price of entry. Sorry, if it pisses off some Technics owners who think the world revolves around their TT, that the AT even comes as close as it does. Technics are good every day TTs for the masses, but they're not a GT2000 by a long shot.
And nobody is trying to make either of these into a real upscale TT. They do what they do. Be happy and spin some vinyl (or shellac)
arcorob
Addicted Member
Amen
+1 :thmbsp:
These are not Delphi tables running through hand built phono stages driven by mega dollar MC cartridges. This is a real world scenario with gear the average hobbyist might put together while sorting and learning. The comparo is entirely valid for that scenario.
Yeah, maybe a Technics can support "more" cartridge than the AT ... We've already alluded to that. But, likely both will top out with cartridges under $1K or so. The arms are not really light enough for super compliant cartridges. And there might be better options for MCs too ...
The AT can easily be improved for less than a KAB kitted Technics. Some "bed liner" under the platter for dampening. Some Dynamat in the plinth/base and some Silicone caulk around the area behind hinges or run w/o the cover (slips off easily enough) as it's the main feedback component.
No need to get crazy with cartridges, but having three or four and 78 on the ready is nice. And for the folks who don't play 78's, it may be one less reason to look here. But I do and I have a few hundred of them from family and friends. Shellac is fun. Sort of like 45's are fun, but different
This is a good little work horse and worth the price of entry. Sorry, if it pisses off some Technics owners who think the world revolves around their TT, that the AT even comes as close as it does. Technics are good every day TTs for the masses, but they're not a GT2000 by a long shot.
And nobody is trying to make either of these into a real upscale TT. They do what they do. Be happy and spin some vinyl (or shellac)
+1 :thmbsp:
Hail Vinyl!
Active Member
These are not Delphi tables running through hand built phono stages driven by mega dollar MC cartridges. This is a real world scenario with gear the average hobbyist might put together while sorting and learning. The comparo is entirely valid for that scenario.
Yeah, maybe a Technics can support "more" cartridge than the AT ... We've already alluded to that. But, likely both will top out with cartridges under $1K or so. The arms are not really light enough for super compliant cartridges. And there might be better options for MCs too ...
The AT can easily be improved for less than a KAB kitted Technics. Some "bed liner" under the platter for dampening. Some Dynamat in the plinth/base and some Silicone caulk around the area behind hinges or run w/o the cover (slips off easily enough) as it's the main feedback component.
No need to get crazy with cartridges, but having three or four and 78 on the ready is nice. And for the folks who don't play 78's, it may be one less reason to look here. But I do and I have a few hundred of them from family and friends. Shellac is fun. Sort of like 45's are fun, but different
This is a good little work horse and worth the price of entry. Sorry, if it pisses off some Technics owners who think the world revolves around their TT, that the AT even comes as close as it does. Technics are good every day TTs for the masses, but they're not a GT2000 by a long shot.
And nobody is trying to make either of these into a real upscale TT. They do what they do. Be happy and spin some vinyl (or shellac)
Great post. :tresbon:
I'll vouch for the ART, and I've heard it. I was surprised at how good it sounded. You'd have to spend a whole lot more to find something clearly audibly superior. It's remarkable that it only costs $39.
- Status